Had this car for a couple hours while my Escape was getting worked on by the Ford dealer. I guess it's the modern replacement to the Crown Vic so no surprise I liked it because I had a Crown Vic for a while.

The base v6 engine (not EcoBoost) had plenty of power, the transmission shifted plenty fast, the car was comfortable and spacious. It looks good too.

Except for one problem.

ITS FRONT WHEEL DRIVE.WHAT WHERE THEY THINKING.

SO MUCH torque steer it's not even funny, and that's the base engine. I can't imagine how bad it is with the EcoBoost or SHO models.

If this car was RWD it would have been perfect.

PS: Yes, I know my Escape is FWD, but there is no torque steer because the little four-banger doesn't have any torque to begin with...

SHO is AWD, so it doesn't have that problem. But I agree. Ford is making the same mistake Acura does. Luxury models should all be RWD. I guess the SUVs can get away with FWD platforms, but sedans cannot.

To each his own, I guess. I prefer a front wheel drive car, with a weight bias over the front wheels for any limited-traction circumstance, like today’s 8-10” snow. A front-engine, rear-wheel drive car is problematic in the snow, even with snow tires, unless you add 200+ pounds of ballast to the trunk. Ninety percent of 4-wheel/all-wheel drive vehicle drivers rarely “need” the capability, particularly compared to a front-drive vehicle with an appropriate seasonal tire choice.

SHO is AWD, so it doesn't have that problem. But I agree. Ford is making the same mistake Acura does. Luxury models should all be RWD. I guess the SUVs can get away with FWD platforms, but sedans cannot.

I don't think the Taurus is considered a luxury model. All the previous ones were also front wheel drive. OP might just not be used to the power. I had the older 2001 Taurus which had 200 hp, this one has 288 but also weights 5-600 pounds more. It also had a little torque steer, but all that meant was that you just have to hold onto the wheel when you punch it. Never felt that was too big a drawback.

To each his own, I guess. I prefer a front wheel drive car, with a weight bias over the front wheels for any limited-traction circumstance, like today’s 8-10” snow. A front-engine, rear-wheel drive car is problematic in the snow, even with snow tires, unless you add 200+ pounds of ballast to the trunk. Ninety percent of 4-wheel/all-wheel drive vehicle drivers rarely “need” the capability, particularly compared to a front-drive vehicle with an appropriate seasonal tire choice.

I went to the E350 4matic. In some respects the AWD is nicer than front wheel drive, there's no torque steer when you punch it. But it's mostly rear wheel biased so I felt that it actually tended to fishtail more than my previous FWD. But the good thing about it was that it doesn't get stuck in snow. That would happen once in a while with FWD, but the trick with getting stuck in FWD is being able to turn the steering wheel and finding the right spot where you might get enough traction to pull out. Never had that problem in AWD, it just goes. Oh and I guess having traction control helps too.

I agree. I can accept not doing cool donuts and powerslides but FWD torque steering is downright annoying. As far as the SHO not having it due to AWD, I don't know. My wife's car is an Explorer Sport (same 3.5L EB AWD) and if you get on it it definitely torque steers while the AWD is working to engage the rear axles.

To each his own, I guess. I prefer a front wheel drive car, with a weight bias over the front wheels for any limited-traction circumstance, like today’s 8-10” snow. A front-engine, rear-wheel drive car is problematic in the snow, even with snow tires, unless you add 200+ pounds of ballast to the trunk. Ninety percent of 4-wheel/all-wheel drive vehicle drivers rarely “need” the capability, particularly compared to a front-drive vehicle with an appropriate seasonal tire choice.